Linkage analysis suggests that mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are responsible for cancer predisposition in more than 80% of the families with high incidence of breast/ovarian cancer. However, pathogenic mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes are generally identified in much less than half of the families investigated in a diagnostic setting with the currently used PCR-based screening protocols. Here we report the identification of two different de novo Alu element insertions within the BRCA1/2 coding sequences in three out of the 50 families in which we found a cancer predisposing mutation, suggesting that this type of mutation is much more common than suggested by their occurrence in mutation databases. The Alu insertion in the BRCA2 gene resulted in the removal of the targeted exon from the corresponding mRNA molecule. Unexpectedly the Target Site Duplications generated by both Alu element insertions contained a specific 9 bp long segment, which might eventually serve as a recognition site for the transposition machinery. Finally, in contrast to the disease causing Alu insertions reported to date, the transposon identified in the BRCA1 gene does not belong to a "young" AluY but to an AluS subfamily, indicating that some of these "old" Alu elements, which are supposed to be non-functional fossil relics, are still able to retrotranspose in vivo.

BackgroundCancer seems to have an independent adverse prognostic effect on COVID-19-related mortality, but uncertainty exists regarding its effect across different patient subgroups. We report a population-based analysis of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 with prior or current solid cancer versus those without cancer.MethodsWe analysed data of adult patients registered until 24 May 2020 in the Belgian nationwide database of Sciensano. The primary objective was in-hospital mortality within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis among patients with solid cancer versus patients without cancer. Severe event occurrence, a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive ventilation and/or death, was a secondary objective. These endpoints were analysed across different patient subgroups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyse the association between cancer and clinical characteristics (baseline analysis) and the effect of cancer on in-hospital mortality and on severe event occurrence, adjusting for clinical characteristics (in-hospital analysis).ResultsA total of 13 594 patients (of whom 1187 with solid cancer (8.7%)) were evaluable for the baseline analysis and 10 486 (892 with solid cancer (8.5%)) for the in-hospital analysis. Patients with cancer were older and presented with less symptoms/signs and lung imaging alterations. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with solid cancer compared with patients without cancer (31.7% vs 20.0%, respectively; adjusted OR (aOR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58). The aOR was 3.84 (95% CI 1.94 to 7.59) among younger patients (<60 years) and 2.27 (95% CI 1.41 to 3.64) among patients without other comorbidities. Severe event occurrence was similar in both groups (36.7% vs 28.8%; aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29).ConclusionsThis population-based analysis demonstrates that solid cancer is an independent adverse prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. This adverse effect was more pronounced among younger patients and those without other comorbidities. Patients with solid cancer should be prioritised in vaccination campaigns and in tailored containment measurements.

Background: Predictive genetic testing has high impact on cancer prevention for BRCA carriers and passing this information in BRCA families is important. Mostly, this is proband-mediated but this path is defective and denies relatives lifesaving information. Objective: To assess the efficacy/safety of an intervention, in which relatives are actively informed. Design: Sequential prospective study in new BRCA families. The proband informed relatives about predictive testing (phase I). After 6 months, a letter was sent to adult relatives who had not been reached (phase II). Then a phone call was made to obtain a final notion of their wishes. All subjects received psychometric testing (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI), an interview and routine counselling. Results: Twenty families were included. Twenty-four of the relatives could not be reached, 59 were ‘decliners’, 47 participated by the proband and 42 by the letter. Predictive testing was performed in 98 % of the participants of which 30 were mutation carriers. The intervention is psychologically safe: the 95 % CI for the estimated mean difference in STAI DY1 between phase II/I subjects (mean difference −1.07, 95 % CI −4.4 to 2.35, p = 0.53) shows that the mean STAI DY1 score (measured at first consult) for phase II is no more than 2.35 units higher than for phase I, which is not relevant. Conclusions: A protocol directly informing relatives nearly doubles the number of relatives tested and is psychologically safe. This should lead to a change in counselling guidelines in families with a strong germline predisposition for cancer.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10689-015-9854-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Fifteen years ago BRCA1 and BRCA2 were reported as high penetrant breast cancer predisposing genes. However, mutations in these genes are found in only a fraction of high risk families. BARD1 is a candidate breast cancer gene, but only a limited number of missense mutations with rather unclear pathogenic consequences have been reported. We screened 196 high risk breast cancer families for the occurrence of BARD1 variants. All genetic variants were analyzed using clinical information as well as IN SILICO predictive tools, including protein modeling. We found three candidate pathogenic mutations in seven families including a first case of a protein truncating mutation (p.Glu652fs) removing the entire second BRCT domain of BARD1. In conclusion, we provide evidence for an increased breast cancer risk associated to specific BARD1 germline mutations. However, these BARD1 mutations occur in a minority of hereditary breast cancer families.

No abstract

A multidisciplinary approach to presumed CFS yields unequivocal CFS in only a minority of patients, and reveals a broad spectrum of exclusionary or comorbid conditions within the domains of sleep medicine and psychiatry. These findings favor a systematic diagnostic approach to CFS, suitable to identify a wide range of diagnostic categories that may be subject to dedicated care.

Early recognition of aspergillosis in a cirrhosis/liver failure patient is crucial and should prompt direct treatment.

BackgroundAs Lens epithelium-derived growth factor (LEDGF/p75) is an important co-factor involved in HIV-1 integration, the LEDGF/p75-IN interaction is a promising target for the new class of allosteric HIV integrase inhibitors (LEDGINs). Few data are available on the genetic variability of LEDGF/p75 and the influence on HIV disease in vivo. This study evaluated the relation between LEDGF/p75 genetic variation, mRNA expression and HIV-1 disease progression in order to guide future clinical use of LEDGINs.MethodsSamples were derived from a therapy-naïve cohort at Ghent University Hospital and a Spanish long-term-non-progressor cohort. High-resolution melting curve analysis and Sanger sequencing were used to identify all single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the coding region, flanking intronic regions and full 3′UTR of LEDGF/p75. In addition, two intronic tagSNPs were screened based on previous indication of influencing HIV disease. LEDGF/p75 mRNA was quantified in patient peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) using RT-qPCR.Results325 samples were investigated from patients of Caucasian (n = 291) and African (n = 34) origin, including Elite (n = 49) and Viremic controllers (n = 62). 21 SNPs were identified, comprising five in the coding region and 16 in the non-coding regions and 3′UTR. The variants in the coding region were infrequent and had no major impact on protein structure according to SIFT and PolyPhen score. One intronic SNP (rs2737828) was significantly under-represented in Caucasian patients (P<0.0001) compared to healthy controls (HapMap). Two SNPs showed a non-significant trend towards association with slower disease progression but not with LEDGF/p75 expression. The observed variation in LEDGF/p75 expression was not correlated with disease progression.ConclusionsLEDGF/p75 is a highly conserved protein. Two non-coding polymorphisms were identified indicating a correlation with disease outcome, but further research is needed to clarify phenotypic impact. The conserved coding region and the observed variation in LEDGF/p75 expression are important characteristics for clinical use of LEDGINs.